d20 Modern vs. controversial D&D rules

[dcollins]

Perusing the new d20 Modern SRD (here: http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=msrd ), particularly the "Combat" document, I noticed that the d20 Modern authors have made a few tweaks to D&D core rules which have spawned arguments in the past:

(1) "Partial Actions" have been deleted, leaving only the following action types: "Attack" (i.e., Standard) , "Move" (MEA), and "Full-Round". A surprise round gives you only an Attack action. A Charge is now definitely a Full-Round Action (as the D&D SRD, not PHB), but again you are allowed a special single-move Charge in a surprise round (as a D&D "partial charge").

(2) The d20 Modern haste spell no longer gives an extra action! It gives one extra attack with a full-round attack, or an extra 30 feet speed on a move. Casting an extra spell with it is specifically prohibited. (I notice that this then looks a lot like the speed weapon enhancement, except it's counter to the Sage's ruling that you can use speed without a full attack action.)

(3) The shield spell has been reduced to just give a +4 bonus to defense (AC) -- no +7 bonus, no apparent true cover, no bonus to saving throws.

So I'm wondering:
- Do other D&D players think these are quality changes?
- Do you think you'll change your D&D games to use these revised rulings?
- What will you do when interfacing D&D characters with d20 Modern characters, with some identically-named spells having different effects?

 

[Petrosian]

I think the notion i had heard was that magic was supposed to be weaker overall in modern vs fantasy era.

The spell they are calling shield sounds a lot like the spell they call mage armor in DND not the spell they call shield.

The haste spell sounds a lot less useful. Matter of fact, it sounds pathetically weak for a third level spell. If it has the same duration as the spell by the same name does in DND, i would consider it a waste of time, ALTHOUGH, if they have dialed down all the other third level spells, it may be in line.

The move, attack and full is basically the way we have played dnd. The nattering neighbobs of literalness who insist on the sanctity of standard actions, which all seems to boil down to not allowing partial charge???, have IMO bigger problems than vauge wording for rules.

i will not be adding the new spell changes to my DND game.
I have already done the move, attack, full thing.

 

[Mercule]

(1) Doesn't sound like much beyond a change in terminology. I prefer the D&D terminology better. It's less confusing ("I use my attack to move!" WTF?)

(2) Unless they've lowered the power of 3rd level spells across the board, this is pretty lame. Actually, even if they have, it's still pretty lame, regardless of spell level. I can only compare to D&D as I haven't played or even seen d20M, but any DM who tried that change on me would be promptly dubbed a hack and be taken about as seriously as the guy who says "I like all the PCs to have an artifact".

I've yet to see Haste used to gain an extra attack. To reduce it to that is like saying Disintegrate is only usable to clear rubble.

(3) Agree with Petrosian.

 

[Mr Fidgit]

I think the notion i had heard was that magic was supposed to be weaker overall in modern vs fantasy era.

it is, in a way. fireball and lightning bolt, for example, still do 1d6 damage per caster level. the limitation is: there are only 10 caster levels

and comparing mage armor to shield...

Mage Armor
Conjuration (Creation) [Force]
Level: Arcane 1; Components: V, S, F; Casting Time: Attack action; Range: Touch; Target: Creature touched; Duration: 1 hour/level (D); Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
An invisible but tangible field of force surrounds the subject of mage armor, providing a +4 equipment bonus to Defense. Unlike mundane armor, mage armor carries no armor penalty, maximum Dexterity bonus, arcane spell failure chance, or speed reduction.



Shield
Abjuration [Force]
Level: Arcane 1; Components: V, S; Casting Time: Attack action; Range: Personal; Target: You; Duration: 1 minute/level (D)
Shield creates an invisible, mobile disk of force that hovers in front of the caster. It negates magic missile attacks directed at the caster. The disk also intercepts attacks, providing a +4 bonus to Defense. The shield carries no armor penalty or arcane spell failure chance.


the difference being, shield has an unnamed bonus which would stack with armor, mage armor does not (armor bonuses in d20 Modern are called equipment bonuses)

 

[Spherecreed]

Not to mention the block of Magic Missile. The only advantage of a mage armor is its range and duration, but there aren't so many classes that really have a use for a mage armor. (I think only a monk would ask a wizard to cast it.)

 

[Drew]

Regarding Haste

I don't think that the D20 modern haste is that bad. The problem I see with Haste as it is is my players use the damned spell in every major fight. I'm not talking about the wizards...I'm talking about fighters with Haste potions, rogues with wands, etc.

In my opinion, any spell that PCs cast in ever major fight is clearly TOO useful. I fail to see how weakening such an overused spell is the same as giving everyone an actifact. That makes little to no sense to me.

A lot of people think that Haste needs tweaking (many of 3E's designers included). The designers of d20 modern have made it weaker, but you guys think its too weak. What would you have Haste do?

Note that d20 modern Haste also gives a +2 dodge bonus to AC.

 

[dcollins]

The nattering neighbobs of literalness...

It's actually spelled "nabob" (alternatively, "nawab"). You may as well spell it correctly when you show off your erudition.

 

[0-hr]

Re: Regarding Haste

In my opinion, any spell that PCs cast in ever major fight is clearly TOO useful.

I agree with you 100% on that one. In fact, IMC, I've house ruled Haste to provide an extra move equivalent action rather than an extra partial.

 

[Mr Fidgit]

i'm curious Ki Ryn, do your players use haste much less with your house rule? or do they still find it effective?

(in other words -- do you or your players think your house rule hamstrings the haste spell?)

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

A few people seem to be expressing the idea that any spell that is cast every fight is too useful and probably needs to be nerfed.

Unfortunately, that would lead to the elimination of the magic system altogether. Here are some spells that I generally see cast every fight (or in used every fight).

[Any spell on a sorceror's spells known list] and

1. Cure Light Wounds, Shield, Mage Armor, Magic Missile, sleep (at low levels).

2. Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Cure moderate wounds, Glitterdust, web.

3. Cure Serious Wounds, Haste, Fireball, Greater Magic Weapon (if available), Magic Vestments (if available)

4. Cure Critical Wounds, Improved Invisibility

Of course, this list reflects the fact that the most effective sorcerors I know of had magic missile, web, fireball, and improved invisibilty on their spell lists. It also reflects the fact that my fighter/wizard character knows Shield, Bull's Strength, Glitterdust, and Haste. If he knew different spells, he'd use a different set of spells every combat/adventure.

If you were to figure that all of these spells needed to be nerfed because they were too useful, it wouldn't mean that characters would suddenly diversify and prepare no more than one spell of each kind which they would then cast in a creative and original manner to do something really neat that you never thought the spell could do. Instead, it would result in characters taking a close look at the spells available to them and coming up with a new set of spells around which they could build strategies. For my fighter/wizard, for instance, it would probably look like this:

1. Lesser energy orb, Protection from evil (without Shield, it's all he'd have for defense)

2. Blindness/Deafness, Web

3. Blink

4. (When he can cast 4th level spells) Fire Shield

For the sorceror I'm thinking of (assuming she were able to change her spells known), it would probably look like:

1. Mage Armor, Negative energy ray

2. Glitterdust

3. Icy Burst or Lightning Bolt

4. Stoneskin or Evard's Black Tentacles

Would you then conclude that all of those spells were broken and needed to be nerfed? The players would then either come up with a new list of spells that they could work with or quit in disgust because there was no longer any point to playing a spellcaster.

Nobody says that melee weapons are overpowered because the fighter uses theirs' every fight. Why would spells be overpowered just because a wizard (or especially a sorceror) uses them every fight?

Spells can certainly be overpowered but the fact that they are commonly used doesn't prove that they are, in fact, overpowered.